What lineup would you want?

bigboi1play · Post #1 » by **bigboi1play** » Sat May 16, 2009 9:37 pm

I'm a fan and want this team to do great but which team would be better after the draft and free agency?

Which squad would you want for the future of this team:
PG: Johnny Flynn/ Beno Udrith
SG: Kevin Martin/ Francisco Garcia
SF: Andreas Nocioni/ Sam Young/ Donte Greene
PF: Blake Griffin/ Jason Thompson/ Donte Greene
C: Spencer Hawes/ Jason Thompson

or

PG: Ricky Rubio/ Beno Udrith/ Jrue Holliday
SG: Kevin Martin/ Francisco Garcia/ Terrance Williams
SF: Andreas Nocioni/ Donte Greene/ Terrance Williams
PF: Paul Milsap/ Jason Thompson
C: Spencer Hawes/ Paul Milsap

If the draft and free agency fell this way what team would you rather be the future, the 1st or the 2nd, if you don't like tell me how you would fix it?

kmart23 · Post #2 » by **kmart23** » Sat May 16, 2009 10:52 pm

rubio/beno/b jax
martin/garcia
marvin williams/nocioni/greene
thompson/diogu/31th pick
hawes/hansbrough/31th pick

Smills91 · Post #3 » by **Smills91** » Sun May 17, 2009 1:32 am

I'll take option #1 thank you.

bflewis · Post #4 » by **bflewis** » Sun May 17, 2009 1:52 am

I'll Take Option #2...
Rubio AND Holiday are WAY better than Flynn
And Thompson isn't better than Griffin but not that big of difference.
But NOOOOOOOOOOO to Hansborough!

Website · Post #5 » by **Nicky Nix Nook** » Sun May 17, 2009 3:29 am

No to Tyler as well. And there is no way we spend that much money on the SF position. More than likely Noc would have to be moved.

OGSactownballer · Post #6 » by **OGSactownballer** » Sun May 17, 2009 3:30 pm

I'm not real big on either of them. For one, I don't understand the heavy push here to upgrade at the SF spot. The guys we have there (Noc/Garcia) are a really good combo as role players for a good team. We might not want to screw around with that because as we know meshing personalities is one of the more difficult things to do. As much as people think it would work, you can't have five all-stars/superstars and have it work - there just aren't enough balls to go around.

I am of a mind to fill in with one-year deals for now and save the capspace for 2010 so that we can wheel and deal at that point with 1) lots of capspace; 2) a lot of high-potential young players on the roster. At that point we would be a LOT closer to being able to do a sudden turn around than right now. I don't favor doing a Boston and giving up the future for the next two to three years. I'
d rather build for the longer haul and be patient for two years.

I still feel that in the long run we would be better off coming out of this draft with Ricky Rubio for our long-term success. If we DO get the #1, I think that we would do even better by trading down to #2 and getting an additional future pick or solid player out of it because RR fits our single biggest NEED right now. I'm not saying that you skip out on talent (Griffin), I jusst think that you can potentially turn that single talent into even more for a team that has a laundry list here.

darkadun · Post #7 » by **darkadun** » Sun May 17, 2009 3:42 pm

I'd take option #1 as well, but 2 is not a bad lineup by any stretch. But, I don't see how we'd be able to get Holiday at 23, unless he falls or we move up.

and OG....I agree, I wouldn't want to do a Boston either. I'd much rather have a good team for the next forseeable decade than have a 2-3 year run.

As for trading the #1, I think its a high risk move. Sure it could pay dividends, but looking back it could also be a huge mistake. But there is no guarantee either way.

OGSactownballer · Post #8 » by **OGSactownballer** » Sun May 17, 2009 8:38 pm

The only way I trade the #1 is if it is a similar deal to when GS and Orlando did it in the Webber/Penny Hardaway draft - and then Orlando/Washington did the same again when they moved Webber. It would have to be the #2 team (so we are guaranteed Rubio) and we would have to receive and unprotected 2010 (and a 2012 also if no player is included). Basically what you have is a similar draft to that one where Webber was the consensus, head and shoulders above #1 and everyone else was jockeying for the #2 spot. If you translate that to Griffin this year then the received value based on his value IN THIS DRAFT should be very similar, and therefore in the long run we could get much better value by trading down one spot and receiving future consideration.

sacking101 · Post #9 » by **sacking101** » Sun May 17, 2009 9:12 pm

Gimme option #1 with no noc. Maybe off the bench but not as a starter for the future. And if we go option #2 we keep Ike and give him a chance to prove those last few games were not a fluke.

SacKingZZZ · Post #10 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Mon May 18, 2009 1:31 am

If we don't land Griffin we need to re-sign Ike for sure, and/or draft DeJuan Blair somehow.

SacKingZZZ · Post #11 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Mon May 18, 2009 1:48 am

If we draft Rubio I wouldn't mind seeing this team adopt the run and gun. There are a couple of players out there that would fit that style. Sign Hakim Warrick and Chris Wilcox. Trade Hawes for Al Thornton? Now I personally would never advocate that particular trade but an interesting idea stylistically speaking.

PG: Rubio/Beno/Collison (#31)
SG: Martin/Garcia
SF: Thornton/Nocioni/Casspi (#23)
PF: Warrick/Greene
C: Thompson/Wilcox

Website · Post #12 » by **Nicky Nix Nook** » Mon May 18, 2009 2:10 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:If we draft Rubio I wouldn't mind seeing this team adopt the run and gun. There are a couple of players out there that would fit that style. Sign Hakim Warrick and Chris Wilcox. Trade Hawes for Al Thornton? Now I personally would never advocate that particular trade but an interesting idea stylistically speaking.

PG: Rubio/Beno/Collison (#31)
SG: Martin/Garcia
SF: Thornton/Nocioni/Casspi (#23)
PF: Warrick/Greene
C: Thompson/Wilcox

HOLY CRAP SacKingzzz that is a terrible trade! Im actually shocked, someone hack your account?

Post #13 » by **KF10** » Mon May 18, 2009 2:15 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:If we draft Rubio I wouldn't mind seeing this team adopt the run and gun. There are a couple of players out there that would fit that style. Sign Hakim Warrick and Chris Wilcox. Trade Hawes for Al Thornton? Now I personally would never advocate that particular trade but an interesting idea stylistically speaking.

PG: Rubio/Beno/Collison (#31)
SG: Martin/Garcia
SF: Thornton/Nocioni/Casspi (#23)
PF: Warrick/Greene
C: Thompson/Wilcox

Come on now, at least trade for Wilson Chandler for Hawes! haha

Post #14 » by **pillwenney** » Mon May 18, 2009 2:25 am

Or don't build around a system that flat out won't lead to championship basketball.

SacKingZZZ · Post #15 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Mon May 18, 2009 9:36 am

Nicky Nix Nook wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:If we draft Rubio I wouldn't mind seeing this team adopt the run and gun. There are a couple of players out there that would fit that style. Sign Hakim Warrick and Chris Wilcox. Trade Hawes for Al Thornton? Now I personally would never advocate that particular trade but an interesting idea stylistically speaking.

PG: Rubio/Beno/Collison (#31)
SG: Martin/Garcia
SF: Thornton/Nocioni/Casspi (#23)
PF: Warrick/Greene
C: Thompson/Wilcox

HOLY CRAP SacKingzzz that is a terrible trade! Im actually shocked, someone hack your account?

Hence.....And to be honest the idea isn't that far off. Thornton was up around 16 and 6 last year.

Draino · Post #16 » by **Draino** » Mon May 18, 2009 10:16 am

bflewis wrote:I'll Take Option #2...
Rubio AND Holiday are WAY better than Flynn
And Thompson isn't better than Griffin but not that big of difference.
But NOOOOOOOOOOO to Hansborough!

probably never seen Johnny Flynn play... dude is the real deal

I would LOVE it if we could snatch him up with Houston's pick, I don't think he'll sit there too long...

Smills91 · Post #17 » by **Smills91** » Mon May 18, 2009 12:14 pm

Draino wrote:
bflewis wrote:I'll Take Option #2...
Rubio AND Holiday are WAY better than Flynn
And Thompson isn't better than Griffin but not that big of difference.
But NOOOOOOOOOOO to Hansborough!

probably never seen Johnny Flynn play... dude is the real deal

I would LOVE it if we could snatch him up with Houston's pick, I don't think he'll sit there too long...

Agreed AGAIN, he's a healthy TJ FOrd with a decent jumpshot.

darkadun · Post #18 » by **darkadun** » Mon May 18, 2009 3:37 pm

^I agree as well. He's a good player and leader. I'd be totally fine with him.

cdt3 · Post #19 » by **cdt3** » Mon May 18, 2009 4:28 pm

The reason we will probably trade Noc is he and Garcia are role players but are similar role players. Neither are lockdown guys anyomre and are more offensive guys. What happens if Kobe is going off for a million points do we a big guy who can lockdown these type of players (Durant, Lebron, Hedo) there are just too many scorers and we need one lock down guy. That was why we drafted Ewing last year in the second round but we had to use him in a trade. We will draft in some order a PG, SF, and big enforcer.

I saw that the Hawks are going to let go PG Acie Law who got no playtime before Bibby. Law put up an 18/5 at Texas A&M but got stuck behind Bibby and was pretty clutch in college. If we get the #1 maybe he is a realistic Free agent target.

murray · Post #20 » by **murray** » Mon May 18, 2009 4:51 pm

Again Ewing was not going to make the team last year. We did not "need" to trade him. We did not need/want him. Horrible pick. Law? Really?